ID : SEE 013

2nd International Conference on Advances in Civil Engineering 2014 (ICACE-2014)

26 28 December, 2014
CUET, Chittagong, Bangladesh

TRANSFLOOR SLAB SYSTEM- A CONVENIENT APPROACH OF RC

CONSTRUCTION
O. C. Debanath1*, G. M. S. Islam1 and M. S. Islam2
1

Department of Civil Engineering, Chittagong University of Engineering & Technology (CUET),

Chittagong-4349, Bangladesh.
2
Civil Engineer, XL Precast, Sydney, 2 Pine Road Yennora, NSW 216, Australia.
*debnathopu60@gmail.com

ABSTRACT
Slab is a key structural element for most of the Civil Engineering construction projects. The transfloor
system is one of the newly developed slab construction technique. In its final form, the slab system is
very much similar to a conventionally reinforced slab beam and column concrete structure. The main
difference lies in the methodology of constructing a reinforced concrete building. The system takes
advantage by using half-slab precast panels (transfloor slab panels), in conjunction with half-beam
precast modules arranged onto in-situ vertical elements, such as columns and shear walls. Moreover,
the lattice girder truss ensures a practical bond between the precast and in-situ concrete. For
convenience, the suggested construction and reinforcement details of this slab system is different from
conventional slab. It offers convenience considering the large space to be constructed with respect to
the minimized extensive use of formworks. The cost and time savings are very apparent with this
system. A direct equivalent of an in-situ slab, transfloor provides the facility to combine precast and
in-situ concrete and offers major benefits to Designers, Engineers and Builders.
Keywords: Slab, Transfloor, Precast, Formwork.

INTRODUCTION
The structural frame system is one of the most important decisions for multistoried building project.
The choice of construction material and system is an important issue for the builders, consultant,
owner and engineers. Reinforced Cement Concrete (RCC) structural frame is mainly used for
multistoried building construction in Bangladesh. This requires longer construction period and huge
manpower. Generally, slab and beam is cast integrally, which makes complex to maintain the proper
design features. Especially for slab, with traditional formworks, maintaining proper level is not easy.
The transfloor slab system is a newly developed composite flooring system with permanent precast
formwork (CCAA T49, 2003). The system, known by several names, depending on the manufacturer,
incorporates precast concrete slabs, usually 55-mm thick (bottom part), with embedded reinforcement
and trusses. The irregular ends of precast panel can easily be prepared. To complete the floor, an
in-situ concrete topping acts compositely with the precast bottom panels. The bottom reinforcement
embedded in the precast panel consist of a layer of mesh, the bottom chords of the trusses and
additional reinforcing bars is required to select by the designer. The embedded trusses also provide

strength and stiffness for handling and transport, allow panels to support construction loads with a
minimum of temporary propping, contribute to the top and bottom reinforcement, and act as bar
chairs to support the top reinforcement (CCAA T49, 2003). After the formation of proper bonding the
precast and cast in-situ portion acts as a composite unit. Moreover, the surface finishing is not
required for this system. The length, width, thickness, plan geometry and reinforcement can be varied
to suit the design requirements(Hansons2000). From the Structural point of view the conventional
slab system is consist of beam-column-slab, where the transfloor slab system provides slab-column
system. This paper focuses on the comparison between the transfloor slab and conventional slab with
respect to economy, design flexibility and other features for an identical building plan.

METHODS
In this study, design of a 4-storied building was considered to compare between conventional
beam-column-slab and column-transfloor system. The building under consideration is designed for
residential purpose. The typical floor plan of the building with precast transfloor panel alignment is
shown in the Fig. 1. In both system of analysis, staircase, partition wall and other fabrications are
considered as same and were not considered for cost estimation, but their corresponding loading
effect is considered in design.

Design considerations
The RCC frame and the structural elements were analyzed and designed for the residential occupancy
live load prescribed in Bangladesh National Building Code (BNBC, 2006). Frames analysis was
carried out using moment distribution method. The other design details are given in Table 1. The
conventional RC slab is designed following ACI coefficient method where, the slab depth is governed
by deflection control criteria and the reinforcement is chosen form flexural requirements, The load
combination is 1.2 Dead load + 1.6 Live load as prescribed in the ACI-318 (2011). The shear
reinforcement requirement is checked and generally found that concrete sections shear capacity is
sufficiently above the ultimate shear.
Table 1: Design details of conventional and transfloor slab system
Particulars

RC Slab System

Transfloor Slab System

Slab

Coefficient method

Australian Standard (AS3600)

No of stories

4
2

Total floor area

238 m

238 m2

Total slab depth

125 mm

190 mm

Live load

2 kN/m2

2 kN/m2

Dead load

3.95 kN/m2

(3.9+0.5) kN/m2

Foundation

Suitable

Suitable

Walls and detailing

N/C

N/C

Staircase and elevator

N/C

N/C

The transfloor slab section is designed in accordance with AS3600 (2014) Clause 8.4. The load
combination used for this system is 1.252Dead load + 1.62 Live load, the dead load includes
0.5 kN/m2 superimposed load. Accepted principles of Ultimate Strength Theory apply to the design of
Transfloor since the finished slab can be considered as monolithic. The only restriction of precast
panel is transport limitations that generally limit maximum width to 2.5 m and maximum length to
approximately 12 m. Special lifting frames are required for units over 8 m long (CCAA T49, 2003).

Five trusses is the practical minimum for 2.5 m wide panel. Irregular shape of precast panel can also
be easily prepared. Corresponding to slab depth the other necessary property of section such as
thickness of polystyrene void formers, top and bottom reinforcement, truss height etc. is shown in
Fig. 3. The typical size of polystyrene void formers is 1000 550 mm and thickness can vary as
required. The spacing of void formers is taken generally 200 mm with a 65 mm minimum clear cover.
Voids must be avoided in regions of high shear (at supports and point loads) and will generally not be
included within one slab depth from the section at which the ribs are just sufficient to resist the
applied shear. However, the shear through the void section is calculated by the formula (1.15wl)/2.
The void percentage is variable from 0-35%. Clear cover of reinforcing bar is usually 20 mm. The
bottom reinforcement is embedded in precast panel and the top reinforcement is fixed on site using
continuous reinforcing bar. As with conventional floors, attention must be given to anchoring of steel
reinforcement at the supports for transfloor design. In general, it is sufficient to anchor 50% of the
total positive moment steel reinforcement required at mid span.

Fig.2 Site installation of precast panel

Fig.1 floor plan with precast panel alignment

Fig.3 Cross sectional details of transfloor slab

The expanded polystyrene (EPS) void formers are made of a light weight cellular plastic material
comprising 98% air, which reduces the self-weight of the slab and provides cost savings in
foundations, columns and beams. The void formers also reduce the volume of in-situ concrete. The
another performance influencing factor is Typical Cycle of RC slab construction, which means the
time required to complete per unit area of slab. One of the major advantages is the typical cycle is
0.62 hr/m2 for traditional formwork, which is only 0.29 hr/m2 for transfloor system. Therefore, total
building construction period can be reduced significantly. Traditional formwork can be totally
eliminated and panels provide both the working platform and part of the completed floor. Typically
up to 150 m2 per hour can be placed by crane. A class 2 off- form grey finish is easily achieved which
means that will not require further treatment and suitable for painting with minimum preparation(Sika

2003). Small penetrations for electric wiring and plumbing could cut on-site. Transfloor slab system
offers lower shrinkage compared to conventional slab (Sika 2003).

RESULTS & DISCUSSION

Cost and Quantity
After analysis, design and estimation the results for conventional and transfloor slab were compared
quantitatively in Table 2. For cost estimation Bangladesh market price of different items are
considered. Propping requirements are reduced when compared with traditional formwork which
means less cluttering of the floor below and earlier access by following trades(CCAA T49, 2003).
Fewer trades are required resulting in a less cluttered, cleaner and safer building site as well as an
immediate work platform is provided. The fire resistance of transfloor is satisfactory when top
concrete cover is minimum 65 mm, however if additional safety is required the designer has the
flexibility to increase the covering.

Elements

Table 2: Analysis results of RC slab system and transfloor slab system

RC SLAB SYSTEM
No.

TRANSFLOOR SLAB SYSTEM

Unit
Quantity

Rate

Amount

(Tk.)

(Tk.)

Quantity

Rate

Amount

(Tk.)

(Tk.)

Precast Concrete(30MPa)

m3

52.5

13800

724500

In- situ Concrete(30MPa)

122

14100

1720200

90

14100

1269000

Steel for Slab(420Mpa)

Tons

4.4

60,000

264000

8.2

60,000

EPS

kg

488

1200

492000
585600

75

13700

1027500

Beam

Concrete(28Mpa)

Steel(420Mpa)

Tons

60,000

420000

Concrete(28Mpa)

m3

40

13700

548000

31

Tons

2.3

60,000

138000

1.25

60,000

Special cost

Foundation

Column

Slab

Description

13700

424700

Concrete(20Mpa)

45

13000

585000

26

13000

10

Steel(420Mpa)

Tons

1.5

60,000

90000

0.7

60000

180

80

14400

100

80

75000
338000
42000
8000

130

93

12090

74

93

6882

4200

33600

2500

20000

952

350

333200

8000

56000

/m

952

100

95200

Total overall cost

4852790

Savings using transfloor slab

Tk.

11

Steel(420Mpa)

Earth cutting

12

Earth filling

13

Bricks

Nos.

14

Scaffolding cost (steel

/m2

Supported)
15
16

Crane cost
Welding

/hr.

% Savings using transfloor slab

4470082

382708
7.89%

For an identical load arrangement, the transfloor slab depth is greater than conventional slab,
therefore, the deflection control and shear resistance is superior in case of transfloor (Glynn, 1981).
The deflection under construction load should not exceed 2 mm. Micro cracks may develop during
lifting, which is eliminate after formation of composite unit. But there are some special arrangement
is required for transfloor panel than RC slab. The precast panel is handled using crane, for which extra
cost and experienced manpower is required. The suitability of transfloor slab depends on availability
of polystyrene void formers. Lattice girder truss provides proper bonding between top and bottom
slab elements, for which the rigidity of transfloor slab is higher. The transfloor slab is cost effective
than any other precast slab like flat slab, grid slab, hollow card slab.
The cost comparison for whole building and different structural elements are compared in Figure 4. It
is observed that the total cost of construction can be reduced by approximately 7.9% using transfloor
slab system. Although the cost of slab installation is higher in transfloor system the beam can be
completely omitted. As a result considering overall cost of beam-slab system, transfloor slab system
could save up to 10.5% cost than conventional slab system. As the self-weight of beam is omitted the
ultimate load on column is also reduced. In some cases the number of columns can also be reduced
which could save around 25% cost. The cost and even type of foundation can also be benefited using
transfloor slab system although the foundation depends on soil condition. Due to reduction of column
load the foundation cost reduced dramatically to 43% considering isolated footing condition.
However, some special cost such as transportation of precast, crane hiring is added in case of
transfloor slab system.

Fig. 4 Cost comparison for buildings with conventional and transfloor slab system
In high seismic zone designer may need some additional measurement, such as edge beam could be
added (Clough, DP. 2011). The transfloor, acting monolithically, will adequately transmit lateral
loads through diaphragm action. The strength and ductility of the overall structural system will
depend on the integrity of the joint detailing and in particular, the connections between the floor
(horizontal diaphragm) and the supporting structure. The flexibility of thin cast in-situ topping slab
that forms the horizontal diaphragm causing overstressing and cracking could result in separation
from the precast elements. A common form of construction for medium rise residential buildings is to
use precast concrete panels or frames for the vertical elements and precast concrete floor planks
without the addition of a topping slab. These precast systems performed poorly due mainly to the
inadequate provision of viable load paths through inadequate tying of the horizontal floor planks to
the vertical elements and to each other for effective diaphragm action.

CONCLUSION
Transfloor slab is one of most popular precast slab system used worldwide at present time. This
comparison is based on structural components only. The price of materials and other necessaries may
vary from place to place. The transfloor system requires some other additional cost but overall the
construction cost is lower in comparison with conventional slab system. From above discussion it is
clear that transfloor slab is a safe, time saving as well as money saving (approximately up to 7.9%)
approach. But the suitability of transfloor slab system is depended on the availability of additional
materials (such as EPS) and instrument (for example precast plant, crane and transportation truck).
For developing country such as Bangladesh, this system is not so familiar, but if the proper supply of
additional materials and instruments can be ensured it could be cost effective and popular in practical
construction.

REFERENCES
Australia's Architecture, Building, Construction and Design Directory (AABCDD). 2014. Australian
precast, functional Australian precast concrete flooring system, Australia. Available at:
www.infolink.
com.au/c/Austral-Precast/Functional-Austral-Precast-Concrete-Flooring-Systemp25860 [Accessed: August 2014].
American Concrete Institute (ACI). 2011. ACI 318: Building Code Requirements for Structural
Concrete and Commentary. American Concrete Institute. 38800 Country Club Dr., Farmington Hills,
MI, 48331-3439 USA.
Bangladesh National Building Code (BNBC). 2006. Bangladesh National Gazettes, Additional,
November, 2006
Rahman, S. and Khan AF. 1993. Reinforced concrete material and building plan, -1st Ed, Farad
publication, Dhaka- 1214.
Cement Concrete & Aggregates Australia (CCAA-T49). 2003. Guide to residential floors, Second
Edition, April 2003. ISBN: 1-877023-07-8.
Clough, DP. 2011. Considerations in the Design of Precast Concrete for Earthquake loads, Journal of
Prestressed Concrete Institute, 27(2); 78-107.
DATEM Engineered Construction. 2005. 99 Mindanao Avenue, Quezon City, DATEM, INC.
Available at: www.datem.com.ph/products_datemfloor.htm [Accessed: August 2014].
Glynn, J. 1981. Test of Transfloor Precast Floor Units, Glynn Tucker and Associates, University
of Queensland, Report No. 7650.
Hansons modern factories. 2000. AS/NZS ISO 9001. Available at: www.hanson.biz/au [Accessed:

august 2014].
Koblenz, H. 1994. Precast Concrete Floors, Part 2, Betonwerk Fertigteil - Tecknik, (BFT), Bauverlag
GmbH, Concrete Precasting Plant and Technology, issue 6/1994.
Nilson, AH; Darwin, D. and Dolan CW. 2004. Design of concrete structure, -13th Ed. ISBN: 007248305-9
Sika Schweiz AG Industry. 2003. Sikatransfloor-352 ST, sikatransfloor-352 SL. Technical data
sheet, version 09/2003., Tffenwies 16 ch-8048 Zurich Switzerland.
Standards Australia. 2001. AS3600 - 2001 Concrete Structures.